I have seen the Penske Camaros use the Z28 finned aluminum valve covers and also the stock stamped steel valve covers painted Traco gray to match the rest of the engine. I think the stamped steel valve covers were used early in the season and the finned ones later on.

Jim Hall's Camaros used the Z28 finned aluminum valve covers. I've never seen photos of his engines running another type of valve cover although I guess its possible.

I have seen the Penske Camaros use the Z28 finned aluminum valve covers and also the stock stamped steel valve covers painted Traco gray to match the rest of the engine. I think the stamped steel valve covers were used early in the season and the finned ones later on.

Jim Hall's Camaros used the Z28 finned aluminum valve covers. I've never seen photos of his engines running another type of valve cover although I guess its possible.

cool deal!......what color is TRACO grey?....is there any high temp paint out there that resembles it?

The photo below, from the Tra-Co Engines website, shows the gray color.I have never painted an engine that color and don't have a suggestion foran off-the-shelf paint can to use but it shouldn't be hard to find somethingsuitable.

The photo below, from the Tra-Co Engines website, shows the gray color.I have never painted an engine that color and don't have a suggestion foran off-the-shelf paint can to use but it shouldn't be hard to find somethingsuitable.

Another question for Pigpen or Jon or anybody. What was the differance between the pre '67 5 liter Can-Am engine and the 302 TA engine? Vince Piggins has always been credited for brainstorming the 327 bore with the 283 stroke to create the 302 in late '66, It seems TRACO was already making these engines at that time. Victor

There probably would not have been a whole lot of difference between a '67 302 Trans-Am Chevy engine and any earlier 302/5-liter used in a Can-Am/USRRC car other than the manifold and induction set-up. Vince Piggins did not brainstorm that bore/stroke combination and I don't recall it ever being written in those kinds of terms. It was a combination that was well known by Chevy drag racers for many years prior to the '67 Z-28. Going back to the old 283 blocks, you could actually bore them out .125" over to get to a full 4-inch bore and racers were happy to have the extra cubic inches. Vince had long known of that bore/stroke combination and recommended it to Pete Estes because that would put them just under the 5-liter limit of the Trans-Am class and give them a cubic inch advantage over the competition which were only offering 289s and 273s at the time.

... It was a combination that was well known by Chevy drag racers for many years prior to the '67 Z-28. Going back to the old 283 blocks, you could actually bore them out .125" over to get to a full 4-inch bore and racers were happy to have the extra cubic inches. Vince had long known of that bore/stroke combination and recommended it to Pete Estes because that would put them just under the 5-liter limit of the Trans-Am class and give them a cubic inch advantage over the competition which were only offering 289s and 273s at the time.

back then.... we called those bored 283 engines '301' ci.. the actual displacement is 301.xx something. Chevy rounded it up to 302. A friend had one in a 51 Henry J when I was in school! it was said among the racers that use of a 59 'Canadian block 283 had a bit more metal to allow the 1/8" overbore without getting too close to the water jackets, but I have no idea if that was true or not.. Anyone else ever heard that logic?Chevy's use of the 327 block and 283 crank gave them an engine closely under the 5 liter limit, and use of the 327 block allowed them to slightly enlarge it to hit the 5 L mark on the head, and have a bit more metal around the water jackets than the old 301 engines. But to be sure, 302, 302, or 305, they all rev and run like a scared rabbit..